What is the "Optical Zoom" equivalent to the 20-50mm?
41211
I can't give a technical answer, but I believe it's magnifies at about a 2X. That is, an object in a normal 35mm picture would get twice as large. Not much of a zoom; may have most value in framing.
1901982
Soccer Hoolian nailed it, get both. The 50mm is irreplacable and I adore my 1.8, it's just louder and more plastic-feeling than the 1.4
735073
I have both the 50mm f1/8 and 40mm f2.8 lens. Both have very short DOF so you have to be careful of your focus. The 50 mm is slightly cheaper but I would rate the 40mm a 4.4 out of 5 and the 50mm 4.2 out of 5.
2054211
The 50mm is actually more "zoomed out," and is therefore probably more functional for indoor family stuff. The 85 is awesome but isn't going to give you anything other than close-ups if you are standing inside of 15-20 feet from the subject.If versatility is your goal, I would strongly suggest something like Sigma 17-35 zoom. I think that's about F/1.8 as well. Same price range. That gives you the flexibility of zooming way out for wide-angle group shots and then back in for relative close-ups.
1333592
Probably a 50 mm would work better for the job, but this macro lens works beautiful on both worlds. And it's reasonably economically
136117
close focussing on the 20mm is not great, for sloes up work you would be better off with the 45mm f2.8 macro Pana-leica or the 60mm macro M.zuiko
1780601
One other option for you might be the 50mm 1.2L. It's just as superb (and erratic) as the 85mm 1.2.
1135875
IMO no. The 35mm or Zeiss 24mm would be much better. If you are outdoors, the 50mm is ok, but if someone is right near you, or you want a landscape/building shot, the focal length of the 50 will be too long. (I own the Zeiss 24 and this 50)
57687
Buy the Rokinon Lens. It's a better build. Rings on the Opteka are made or cheap plastic and can crack.
399354
Yes, optical zoom is now 24-70 (was 28-100) but aperture only goes from 1.8-2.8 as opposed to 1.8-4.9 on the older lens. Many enthusiasts prefer the faster aperture and 24mm wide over bigger zoom range.
1625661
With a reversed 50 mm lensa you'll get a magnification factor of about 0.4X. In other words, the linear dimensions of the sensor image will be about 0.4 times the real dimensions. That's quite enough for coins and such; not so good for small insects.
1287966
The lens you have is a zoom lens. This is a prime lens. Meaning you can't zoom with this but on the other hand 50mm is good in low light situation. Its Shallow depth of field will make picture look good.
745839
This according to Nikon: NIKKOR lens with 30x optical zoom; 4.0-120.0 mm (35mm [135] format equivalent: 22.5-675 mm); f/3.0-5.8
547718
Kristy, I agree in principal with both of the other commenters. However, I'm not sure those answers completely address your situation. As not to compare apples to oranges, are you talking specifically about zooms or fixed lens? If you are interested in getting a zoom type lens, especially one f2.8 or faster, you are talking about some sizable dollars. Zoom range, low light capabilities, absence of distortion, cost constrictions and your personal standards create a host of considerations. But, comparing a digital fixed lenses specs to a digital zoom lens specs is not a fair caparison at all.
1711775
No issue with the full 20x optical zoom. Suggest that you run a test under ideal condition i.e. with the camera on a tripod. You will get degradation when using the digital zoom at or near the max zoom.
1796672
Hi Jorge, it's beautiful. I normally use the 50mm 1:1.2. I'm spoiled and prefer this over any zoom.
1253004
I have the exact same question. Please do post your findings. I am confused too. Apparently 18-200 is supposed to have larger zoom but I want to make sure that the quality of 18-200 matches to 18-135 at the least upto 135 mm. If so i will go with 18-200 for sure.